Multiple dead in shootings at multiple mosques in Christchurch, New Zealand

[chipbennett]

When all you have is a spectrum, everything looks like a point (on that line)

I get what you wish to say, but if one considers that line to encompass the totality of possible viewpoints then everybody falls on it somewhere. If you want to introduce a crazy axis at right angles to the ideology axis, then we can talk about quadrants rather than left and right and include more nuance

Some acts, although having political effect, aren't done as a result of holding a belief on the political spectrum (regardless of number of axes one uses to define that spectrum).

Sometimes acts are committed merely because the actor is evil, or not mentally sound. Such people can make statements that imply certain political beliefs, but even if such person adheres to those political beliefs, correlation does not prove causation.

 

[chipbennett]

I was just making this statement to emphasise the absurdity of the statement I was quoting, I should have done a better job. I don't think that about ANY group as a whole. On a side note, Hitler was a Christian and more importantly, those who carried out his orders were Christian. Stalin was a Seminary trained priest. Pol Pot was a Buddhist. Again, many of their followers were religious. Many of your 95% of humanity (even more 50 or 60 years ago) who have religious beliefs were also helping those leaders do what they did.

No, he wasn't.

Atheists like to claim that Hitler was Christian, but it just isn't true. He was raised by Christian parents, but rejected Christian beliefs and wanted to wipe out the church in the Third Reich. As with most other evil tyrants of his ilk, he readily used/abused religion to manipulate adherents to do his bidding. He managed to appeal to their base instincts (Jamil: see: basic human nature) and coerced them into acting contrary to their religious doctrine.

Similarly, Stalin and Pol Pot both implemented explicitly secular governments and forms of government (communism is diametrically opposed to religion). Pol Pot completely undermined Buddhist belief under the Khmer Rouge while persecuting all other religions. Stalin attempted to eradicate the belief in God in the USSR through the Atheist Five-Year Plan.

 

[NKBJ]

About the new age nitwits that were bankrolled to take over Europe, researching the old Germanic Saturnine beliefs is an eye opening experience. As regards this event in New Zealand I'm looking forward to reading what citizen journalists turn up. The guy's history, his associations, his prescriptions. All with an eye towards cui bono.

 

[jamil]

Some acts, although having political effect, aren't done as a result of holding a belief on the political spectrum (regardless of number of axes one uses to define that spectrum).

Sometimes acts are committed merely because the actor is evil, or not mentally sound. Such people can make statements that imply certain political beliefs, but even if such person adheres to those political beliefs, correlation does not prove causation.

Some. You say. Doesn’t that imply some are political? I have fewer assumptions to make and no ideology to confirm just by reading the manifesto as he intended. Ayn Rand is full of **** on her view of human nature. We are individually self interested, sure. But we also have the capacity to be identity driven as well. Humans are also group-interested. That IS a part of self interest, indeed. However, it’s easier to believe he acted for the reasons he claimed than to impose assumptions based on worldview. Clearly he is a right wing identitarian extremist. His actions are consistent with that.

 

[jamil]

No, he wasn't.

Atheists like to claim that Hitler was Christian, but it just isn't true. He was raised by Christian parents, but rejected Christian beliefs and wanted to wipe out the church in the Third Reich. As with most other evil tyrants of his ilk, he readily used/abused religion to manipulate adherents to do his bidding. He managed to appeal to their base instincts (Jamil: see: basic human nature) and coerced them into acting contrary to their religious doctrine.

Similarly, Stalin and Pol Pot both implemented explicitly secular governments and forms of government (communism is diametrically opposed to religion). Pol Pot completely undermined Buddhist belief under the Khmer Rouge while persecuting all other religions. Stalin attempted to eradicate the belief in God in the USSR through the Atheist Five-Year Plan.

Meaningless. Religious tyrants have exploited belief throughout human history. There is no point in the incessant bickering between religious people and atheists about who has tyrannized most. It’s irrelevant. Some humans suck. You get your belief cascading a certain way and you could suck just as much. Schindler’s are much rarer than willing participants. Apathetic blind eyes are dime a dozen.

 

[Ingomike]

Scooped! See post #450 above...

I sure missed that, the thread had been drug off in the weeds and saw a couple of interesting things to share. Good job.

 

[BigRed]

A murderer walks into a building filled with unarmed people and kills dozens at will with no resistance.

State's response?

Make it even more difficult for people to arm and defend themselves against a murder that walks into a building intent on killing dozens of people.

Brilliant.

 

[BigBoxaJunk]

Meaningless. Religious tyrants have exploited belief throughout human history. There is no point in the incessant bickering between religious people and atheists about who has tyrannized most. It’s irrelevant. Some humans suck. You get your belief cascading a certain way and you could suck just as much. Schindler’s are much rarer than willing participants. Apathetic blind eyes are dime a dozen.

I agree with that. I think that getting caught up in the whole "good" & "evil" thing is bound to steer you away from the truth, at times. Anyway, "good" & "evil", as all descriptors, are entirely subjective, neither specific nor measurable. An effective, inclusive study of a shooter's motivations could really only be done by people who don't have, are uninterested in, or could keep separate from, political or religious leanings. (In other words, if that even happens, it won't be widely supported or reported).

 

[jamil]

I agree with that. I think that getting caught up in the whole "good" & "evil" thing is bound to steer you away from the truth, at times. Anyway, "good" & "evil", as all descriptors, are entirely subjective, neither specific nor measurable. An effective, inclusive study of a shooter's motivations could really only be done by people who don't have, are uninterested in, or could keep separate from, political or religious leanings. (In other words, if that even happens, it won't be widely supported or reported).

I think that's why we can't have a "national conversation" on anything. The national conversation is not about what really happened and exactly why it happened. Everything gets politicized or idealized into what people want it to be about. It can be objective, just like the study of anything can be objective. It just won't be.

 

[spencer rifle]

Clearly he is a right wing identitarian extremist. His actions are consistent with that.

Not quite so clear. Eco-fascism, drastic population reduction to save the planet, etc., are hardly right-wing positions.

 

[BigBoxaJunk]

In a not-totally-unrelated note, I had seen a thing about Finland being ranked as the number one country for the happiness of it's citizens a couple days ago. Of course, the article would have you to believe that the reasons for that are mostly because of their great govt run health care system, and the govt sponsored gender-pay equality, and the fact that Finnish men spend more time with their kids than the moms in many cases.

But when you look further into it, you will also find that Finland ranks as one of the least culturally diverse countries in the world, with comparatively far fewer immigrants than most other European countries. Finland is also a comparatively sparsely populated country as well, with more people living in the same kinds of communities, living the same kinds of lives that their parents, grandparents, and great-grandparents lived.

The article where I found the cultural diversity info was careful to say that "correlation doesn't equal causation" in regards to overall happiness, but the article about health-care and gender-pay equality made it clear that it was totally so.

 

[jsx1043]

A murderer walks into a building filled with unarmed people and kills dozens at will with no resistance.

State's response?

Make it even more difficult for people to arm and defend themselves against a murder that walks into a building intent on killing dozens of people.

Brilliant.

To the point. I saw a post earlier that said:

“This week’s gun control argument in a nutshell: Because government failed at every level, you need to have your rights curtailed...by the government that just failed at every level.”

Although not necessarily 100% correct for NZ as firearm possession is not a right, I think the context still applies, and is the base argument for gun control after any and every use of firearm for an attack.

 

[Ingomike]

I agree with that. I think that getting caught up in the whole "good" & "evil" thing is bound to steer you away from the truth, at times. Anyway, "good" & "evil", as all descriptors, are entirely subjective, neither specific nor measurable. An effective, inclusive study of a shooter's motivations could really only be done by people who don't have, are uninterested in, or could keep separate from, political or religious leanings.

It really is about the humans that want to control other humans and take the fruit of others labor, that is always what it boils down to. The religion or political philosophy is just a tool for most or a crutch for some...

 

[BigRed]

To the point. I saw a post earlier that said:

“This week’s gun control argument in a nutshell: Because government failed at every level, you need to have your rights curtailed...by the government that just failed at every level.”

Although not necessarily 100% correct for NZ as firearm possession is not a right, I think the context still applies, and is the base argument for gun control after any and every use of firearm for an attack.

Firearm possession is a right.... it's just suppressed by NZ.

 

[KG1]

I think that's why we can't have a "national conversation" on anything. The national conversation is not about what really happened and exactly why it happened. Everything gets politicized or idealized into what people want it to be about. It can be objective, just like the study of anything can be objective. It just won't be.

A purely emotionally driven politicized “national conversation” can’t be rational without objectivity, logic and reason.

 

[NKBJ]

A murderer walks into a building filled with unarmed people and kills dozens at will with no resistance.

State's response?

Make it even more difficult for people to arm and defend themselves against a murder that walks into a building intent on killing dozens of people.

Brilliant.

Thesis, antithesis, synthesis (problem-reaction-solution).
Gotta love it when a plan comes together.

 

[Route 45]

A few weeks ago, if someone had asked me to name a country where you could go to jail for up to 14 years for reading a document, I'd have never guessed...

https://www.radionz.co.nz/news/nati...sque-shootings-manifesto-deemed-objectionable

 

[KLB]

A few weeks ago, if someone had asked me to name a country where you could go to jail for up to 14 years for reading a document, I'd have never guessed...

https://www.radionz.co.nz/news/nati...sque-shootings-manifesto-deemed-objectionable

No kidding. Hard to believe that any supposedly "free" country has a Chief Censor.

 

[Expat]

Sounds like we need a cool Ministry of Truth.

 

[Route 45]

https://www.thetruthaboutguns.com/2...-down-confiscation-website-due-to-dos-attack/

The submissions are hilarious.